Reply from authors: Prosthesis–patient mismatch is not synonymous with elevated transvalvular pressure gradient

JTCVS Open, vol. 8, pp. 249–250

Abstract

We thank Ternacle and Pibarot for their letter in which they discuss that prosthesis–patient mismatch (PPM) is not the same as an elevated gradient across a prosthetic heart valve.1 In fact, the aim of our analysis was to validate previous results of their group published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology, in which they propose the commonly used cut-off point for PPM.2 Their study shows that an indexed effective orifice (EOAi) area of 0.85 cm2/m2 corresponds with the point where mean aortic gradient accelerates, which directly implies that the presence of PPM corresponds with elevated transprosthetic pressure gradients.

Authors 2

1. Michiel D. Vriesendorp Aachen Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery

   Leiden University Medical Center

   Affiliation as printed

   Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands

2. Robert J.M. Klautz Aachen Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery

   Leiden University Medical Center

   Affiliation as printed

   Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands